[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YPfDUN6CaOdGZLPS@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 07:48:48 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
Mark Zhang <markz@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next 7/7] RDMA/core: Create clean QP creations
interface for uverbs
> +struct ib_qp *ib_create_qp_user(struct ib_device *dev, struct ib_pd *pd,
> + struct ib_qp_init_attr *attr,
> + struct ib_udata *udata,
> + struct ib_uqp_object *uobj, const char *caller);
> +static inline struct ib_qp *ib_create_qp_uverbs(struct ib_device *dev,
> + struct ib_pd *pd,
> + struct ib_qp_init_attr *attr,
> + struct ib_udata *udata,
> + struct ib_uqp_object *uobj)
> +{
> + if (attr->qp_type == IB_QPT_XRC_TGT)
> + return ib_create_qp_user(dev, pd, attr, NULL, uobj,
> + KBUILD_MODNAME);
> +
> + return ib_create_qp_user(dev, pd, attr, udata, uobj, NULL);
Why not always pass along the udata and caller and just not use them
in the low-level code?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists